Milwaukee County

Milwaukee County judge halts city's sick pay ordinance

An overflow crowd at the Milwaukee County Courthouse watches proceedings on a small monitor in the hallway Friday after finding out they couldn’t get into the courtroom for a hearing on a temporary injunction blocking Milwaukee’s mandatory paid sick leave ordinance.

A Milwaukee County circuit judge on Friday halted enforcement of Milwaukee's paid sick-day ordinance, just four days before the measure was scheduled to go into effect.

Before a packed courtroom of ordinance supporters and opponents, with many spilling into the hall where a monitor was set up so they could follow the proceedings, Judge Thomas R. Cooper granted the temporary injunction sought by the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce.

The business organization called the ordinance a job killer for the city and has challenged the legality of the measure, which was passed with 69% of the vote in the Nov. 4 election.

Supporters argue that workers should not be forced to choose between being sick or caring for a sick child and a paycheck.

Milwaukee is only the third city in the country to pass such an ordinance. San Francisco and Washington, D.C., are the others.

Cooper set a hearing on a permanent injunction for May 11. He said he has not made up his mind how he will rule.

"But there's a dead certainty that the case will go to the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court," he said of the likely appeals.

Cooper said he was surprised he was the fourth judge to get the case after two recusals and a substitution of judges. And, he said, he was surprised by the interest, especially the one-inch thick stack of "friends of the court" briefs he's received in the case, largely from businesses and business interest groups.

"This case really has shaken up the community," Cooper said.

He called the decision to issue a temporary injunction necessary and not difficult.

"This call is such a big deal to everybody that we better do it right from the start," he said.

For the city and employers, implementing paid sick days is a major issue, he said. And if the ordinance is enacted and then overturned, those in low-paying jobs who can least afford it could be faced with paying back the benefit they had received, he said.

The proceeding also was unusual because the city, a defendant in the case, did not object to the request for a temporary injunction.

Instead, the case against the injunction was argued by attorneys for 9to5, National Association of Working Women, which asked to join the city as a defendant.

It was 9to5 that led a coalition of community groups that collected more than 40,000 signatures to bring the ballot question to voters through seldom-used direct legislation. That approach bypassed the Common Council and Mayor Tom Barrett.

Barrett opposed the measure before the election, saying it was bad for business and jobs, but has promised to enforce it. The 9to5 organization has criticized Barrett and city officials for not fighting the legal challenge.

Deputy City Attorney Linda Burke argued that the city is not conceding the legal issues in the case, but that it will be costly to implement. The city Equal Rights Commission, which is supposed to enforce the ordinance, is just being reformed and has no staff, she said.

"We're not ready," she said.

MMAC attorney Scott Beightol argued that the ballot question was not concise. He called the ordinance constitutionally vague and said it will be expensive for businesses.

Barbara Zack Quindel, an attorney for 9to5, said it could be 90 days before anyone could take paid sick leave under the ordinance.

"The city wants to abdicate its responsibility and not enforce this," she said. "The MMAC and the city fail to understand that for those without paid sick days, there is a hardship, and those workers are voiceless and the most economically vulnerable who work in low-paying jobs."

She added: "This is really an attack on direct legislation, and the legislative body here is the electorate."

After the ruling, she said she remains confident that the ordinance will withstand the legal challenge.

MMAC President Tim Sheehy said the legislative mandate threatens regional competitiveness at a time when families and businesses can least afford it.

"We are extremely pleased that the court has agreed to call a 'time out' on implementation of this ordinance until all the legal questions surrounding it can be thoroughly reviewed," he said.

Henry Hamilton of the NAACP, who attended the hearing, said he didn't like that the city has neglected having an Equal Right Commission since 2003, when it disbanded, and now argues that's a reason the ordinance can't be implemented.

"It's reprehensible," Hamilton said.

Under the ordinance that was supposed to take effect Tuesday, all private-sector employers in the city must offer paid sick leave to all full-time, part-time and temporary employees. Workers would earn one hour of sick leave for every 30 hours worked, up to nine days for workers in large companies and five days for workers in small businesses.

The paid leave could be taken for illness or medical care for the employee or the employee's child, parent or other relative. The time could also be used for medical and legal issues resulting from domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking.